COUNCIL bosses’ rejection of a £70 million out-of-town retail park has been branded “anti-competitive”.

In a lively final day of a planning appeal into the Tollgate Village plans, Colchester Council chiefs were also accused of being “overly protective of established interests”.

The controversial proposals were refused twice by the authority last year amid concerns over the impact the scheme would have on the town centre.

But applicants Tollgate Partnership appealed against the decision, arguing its plans would create a 1,000 jobs and bring £17 million in shoppers’ spending a year.

During Friday’s closing submissions Sasha White, QC, acting for Colchester Council, also attacked the partnership for keeping the true plans - which would divert £36.5 million of spending away from the town centre - “cloaked in mystery”.

He added: “Not one occupier is signed up, has said they will take space or agreed heads of terms.”

Next and River Island, however, have indicated interest.

He added: “This is an animal whose nature, form and characteristics are purposefully hidden.

“This proposal unquestionably has the potential and is likely to inflict significant harm upon the town centre for many decades.

“It will do it in two stages - the impact of what is sought and then the impact of the release of current restrictions on the existing floorspace.

“That is certain. If this proposal is granted permission, it will cause enormous, permanent and deep damage to the town centre, the people of Colchester and any long-term viability of the town centre.

“ It will condemn the town centre to a constant, difficult and exhausting battle to retain its place in the retail hierarchy against a rival which is far more nimble, cheaper in terms of rents, more convenient and more flexible in every way.”

“It will condemn the town centre to fight a battle in which it is inherently at a disadvantage.”

Mr White also revealed initial Vineyard Gate developer, the Caddick Group, was reluctant to proceed because of the “shadow” cast by Tollgate Village. That retail-led development, together with a leisure-led scheme at the former bus station and Priory Walk have been put forward as an “reasonable” alternative.

But Christopher Katkowski QC, acting for the Tollgate Partnership, said that scenario would be “fractured” and “scattered”.

He added: “It would still be necessary for each of the sites in question to be available and viable for the parts of the proposed development.

"There is no evidence at all that any of the sites are available and viable for these purposes.”

He added: “There are compelling reasons to grant permission for these proposals whereas the opposition to them amounts to an anti-competitive stance which is overly protective of established interests at the expense of pursuing the greater public good,”

Planning inspector Ken Barton will submit his findings to Local Government Secretary Sajid Javid, who will take the final decision.